Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this research, the normalization performance of the proposed adjusted min-max methods was compared to the normalization performance of statistical column, decimal scaling, adjusted decimal scaling, and min-max methods, in terms of accuracy and mean square error of the final classification outcomes. The evaluation process employed an artificial neural network classification on a large variety of widely used datasets. The best method was min-max normalization, providing 84.0187% average ranking of accuracy and 0.1097 average ranking of mean square error across all six datasets. However, the proposed adjusted-2 min-max normalization achieved a higher accuracy and a lower mean square error than min-max normalization on each of the following datasets: white wine quality, Pima Indians diabetes, vertical column, and Indian liver disease datasets. For example, the proposed adjusted-2 min-max normalization on white wine quality dataset achieved 100% accuracy and 0.00000282 mean square error. To conclude, for some classification applications on one of these specific datasets, the proposed adjusted-2 min-max normalization should be used over the other tested normalization methods because it performed better.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saichon Sinsomboonthong (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: